Stand-Alone Movies Multiple Star Wars films per year?

Overkill.

They risk over-exposure with only one movie per year.

 

One movie per year is plenty.

 

I disagree with your disagreement, this future of "mega-franchises" doesn't sound very exciting to me, let Star Wars be an event, even yearly spin-offs are already a bit of a stretch. Don't turn SW into the Marvel Cinematic Universe please, this is a different beast. There's already a problem with lack of ideas in Hollywood, why make the summer even more crowded with spin-offs?

 

Yeah, agreed on overkill. One every year would be too much. Multiple per year would hurt the brand.

 

There isn't really a "lack of ideas" in Hollywood. There are many writers with many great ideas. The problem is that the studios have become absurdly risk-averse. They only want to make the safest of bets.

 

Limiting it? I'm sorry, but if every studio thought like that, then we would be having two spin offs for Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean and Avatar every year. Sometimes it's not a bad thing to do a film only once in a while.

 

Yeah, because them getting sequels and Harry Potter getting another trilogy is the exact same thing as 2 Star Wars related films per year, lol. And what's the problem with Pirates 5 and Avatar? In least they're taking a long time between films (even if the next 3 Avatar films are coming in succession), not deciding to stretch the brand for as much as they can.

Hell, look at Pirates of the caribbean, when was the first film? 2003? 2004? the 5th film is almost coming out when the 3rd film is 10 years old.

Star Wars isn't the MCU, what you're proposing is complete overkill. There's no problem in a new spin-off here and there, but we don't need to see the background of every single main character, and the general public will only get tired of the universe.

 

No, i brought out if we started getting 2 films related to each one of those franchises, not if they got any sequel or spin-off, since i knew they were already getting those and am closelly following news on them. And the planned Harry Potter spin-off is supposed to be a trilogy, go use search if you don't believe me.

And the thing with Avatar is that they waited some 7 years to do those 3 films, and after them, there are no plans for spin-offs to continue, unlike with Star Wars, that is now supposed to come every year. With MCU i think you completelly lost the point of what i was saying and comparing, because what you're asking for Star Wars to do is what they're already doing with the MCU.

 

1 per year film is the most ideal, in my opinion.

2 or more per year would be too much.

 

With good ideas, and a "working franchise in the back", i think it would be no risk to bring every year a Star Wars movie... (maybe every two years a Star Wars movie, and the other year a spin-off)

With the right concept you could easily extend the franchise to 2 movies a year! There are so many possibilities - for example, you could show inbetween the Star Wars movies, solo movies with just "some" main characters. Or how about movies with some other characters...
There are so many stories to tell...

Like, if you take the original trilogie, movies for Darth Vader, Han Solo, Luke, Boba, Emporer... leading to the next Star Wars movie!

Only problem - the next trilogy has to work. With the original trilogy - i think - you would have had many possibilities. With the last trilogy it would have been difficult. Nobody knows if the new trilogy works?!

 

Leave other stories of tv shows, novels, video games and comics, i would prefer the Star Wars films to not go into overkill, i think one per year is already too much, hell, i think each episodic entry should take 3 years between release like the last trilogies did, instead of only 2 as it seems they're doing now.